Open Access to scientific publications Jos Engelen President, Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research Faculty Professor, Fac. of Science, University of Amsterdam and NIKHEF, Amsterdam
ESF/Eurohorcs vision and roadmap: implement common policy on Context: ESF/Eurohorcs vision and roadmap: implement common policy on Open Access Working Group (chair Georg Botz, Max Planck Society) reported Oct. 20, 2011, Berlin excellent report, adopted by General Assembly Preliminary remark: in principle the issue is straightforward (‘everybody’ agrees it should be done). In practice it is complicated if we want to keep the (established) publishers on board, who have indeed made essential contributions to putting in place very high quality standards (editorial process, peer review) leading to ‘top’ journals (...) We should make it clear to them, with one voice (that is what Science Europe is for) that OA is not negociable, it has to be implemented now. 8-6-2011
Scholarly Benefits of Open Access Once open access is the rule rather than the exception, many important benefits to research are to be expected Greater visibility A revolution in scientific search and information retrieval Innovative new information services some of them commercial Fostering interdisciplinary research by broadening access Providing access to: SMEs, community professionals, education. These observations provide more motivation than matters of principle (e.g. why do scholars give away copyright to their work?)
Recommendations The working group supports the overall vision of the road map. The aim is a system of scientific publications in which free access to all (published) scientific information is guaranteed. This involves a move towards Full Open Access. Ultimately, this means replacing the present reader-paid publication system with an author- or institution-paid one Some concrete mid-term actions will make the implementation of the vision more feasible.
Recommendations R1: Define roles and responsibilities for Open Access Establish a central point of contact for all questions related to Open Access in each EUROHORCs MO This measure will help promoting the awareness of the importance of Open Access amongst researchers and administrators.
Recommendations R2: Agree on a general statement regarding publication costs The cost of publication is an integral and legitimate part of the cost of doing and disseminating research But: Will authors sacrifice grant money to pay author charges? The working group offers to provide a draft.
Recommendations R3: Implement policies and workflows that allow scholars to pay Open Access “publication charges” RPO and RFO have to make policy and budgetary decisions that will enable them to finance the publication system in the new way. This implies organizational issues, e.g. new workflows, as well. The working group can help to shape such policies by providing good practice examples and sharing experiences how to make these policies sustainable. Publishing costs money and provides benefits to the scholarly community. The working group supports the view that the payment of fees that enable Open Access publications is ultimately the responsibility of the author’s employer or of the organisation, which funds the research. RPO and RFO have to make policy and budgetary decisions that will enable them to finance the publication system in the new way. This implies organizational issues, e.g. new workflows, as well.
Recommendations R4: Agree on conditions for covering “Open Access Gold” fees Agree on a set of requirements as a precondition of “Open Access Gold” fees to be covered from MO’s budgets Avoid “double dipping” in case of “hybrid” Open Access journals What do we want to buy? The working group offers to make concrete suggestions for such requirements. Open Access publication fees have to be taken into account, alongside other revenue streams and all costs, when setting subscription prices for hybrid journals
Recommendations R5: Support transitions to Open Access Develop a common program that encourages publishers to change the business model of prestigious subscription based journals from all disciplines to Open Access or to launch new high level Open Access journals. Publishers have to address practical issues. To enable progress, the research community must address these issues too: RPO and RFO should try to create a funding environment that enables publishers to change to open access if they wish. The working group will work on proposals for initiatives in collaboration with partner groups.
Recommendations R6: Agree on standards for “Open Access Green” Work on a set of standards for archiving and reuse (e.g. version, format, embargo, metadata) Define entitlements for “Open Access Green” already in the subscription license agreements This approach could build on experiences that are currently being made with the nationwide opt-in “Alliance licences” in Germany
Summary General Assembly approved recommendations Define roles and responsibilities for Open Access Agree on a general statement regarding publication costs Implement policies that allow scholars to pay Open Access “publication charges” Agree on conditions for covering “Open Access Gold” fees Support transitions to Open Access Agree on standards for “Open Access Green”
Example: NWO has made available a budget to help (‘catalyze’) the transition to Open Access Incentive Fund for Open Access - Publications Incentive Fund Open Access – sessions of scientific conferences Incentive Fund Open Access Journals Project OAPEN-NL / OAPEN Foundation Communication on Open Access